Ruling says U.S. can keep man out

Decision reversed on federal appeal

A federal judge overstepped his authority in ruling Chicago-area Muslim leader Sabri Samirah could return to the United States despite unspecified national security concerns raised by the government, a federal appeals court decided Wednesday.

A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled federal courts don't have jurisdiction to review discretionary decisions of the attorney general such as blocking Samirah, who is not a naturalized citizen, from returning to the U.S.

In December Samirah had obtained approval from the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, now part of the Department of Homeland Security, to travel to his native Jordan to visit his mother.

He was granted "advance parole," authorizing him to travel outside the U.S. while his application for permanent residency was pending.

But in January, the INS revoked his parole on the attorney general's behalf, based on information he was a "security risk to the United States." It barred his re-entry during a stopover in Ireland.

Samirah sued, and in March U.S. District Senior Judge James B. Moran ruled Samirah should not have been barred because he enjoyed constitutional protections after living for 15 years in the U.S.

"The government cannot short-circuit the rights of an alien who has long lived in the United States by revoking his parole and then treating him as if he had never been here at all," Moran said.

But before Samirah, 36, could return to his Orland Park home--where his wife and three American-born children live--the appeals court put Moran's ruling on hold until it decided the government's appeal of the decision.

In Wednesday's ruling, written by Judge Daniel A. Manion, the appeals court decided Moran lacked jurisdiction to even review the revocation of Samirah's parole, in large part because Samirah was not in custody when he filed the case.

"Samirah's problem is that, by dint of the government's revocation of his parole and his lack of the proper documents, he is not free to return," the opinion said. "But the United States is exercising no ongoing control, restraint or responsibility over him. As far as the government is concerned, Samirah may wander the earth, so long as his wanderings do not lead him to the United States."

Samirah's lawyer, Mark Flessner, said the decision did not address the central issue in the case: whether the government failed to follow its own procedures by not giving Samirah a hearing before an immigration judge.

"The court of appeals has failed to consider the legality of the government's actions," Flessner said. "It certainly should give all Americans pause if the government can be both judge and jury without review."

Flessner said he is considering options, including asking the appeals court to reconsider its decision.

Samirah, now said to be in Jordan, was an outspoken critic of U.S. policy in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as head of the United Muslim Americans Association, a political advocacy group based in Palos Hills that focuses on registering Muslims to vote.

He also was chairman and board member of the Islamic Association for Palestine, an organization that federal authorities have investigated in search of ties to the Islamic militant group Hamas.

Samirah has denied any links to terrorist groups.

Seema Imam, vice president of the Muslim Civil Rights Center, said the ruling has left Muslims worried about leaving the country for fear they won't be allowed back.

Imam said some Muslims have decided to permanently leave America--not because they are guilty of anything but because they don't want to be bothered anymore.

"It's a nightmare, what's happening now," Imam said. "This country is based on immigration, and Muslims are not a threat to this country."

Imam defended Samirah as a good man who was trying to help Muslims become voters and participate in the U.S. political system.

"All of it is outrageous," she said. "It's just tearing people's lives apart. Where is justice?"